Motivation: We submitted a replication of a study that was previously published in Learning and Individual Differences. The original work was rife with errors between the results, analyses, and interpretation of these results.

Our findings demonstrated that the original results did not replicate and we even refined the previous work within a larger, more diverse sample. We do not believe that our manuscript was free of faults, but it was a major improvement over the original work.

Two out of three of our reviewers suggested publication of our manuscript pending edits, however one reviewer flat out rejected our work without strong rationale for doing so. They stated that we misquoted and misinterpreted the original paper- which is not true at all. We provided direct quotations from the original manuscript!

The editor then took 7 months to reject the manuscript, stated that the manuscript had its strengths, but then indicated it wasn't an appropriate fit for the journal. Again, this was a replication of work that was previously published in Learning and Individual Differences... so how does it not fit within the journal four years after the original study is published.